From: Alexei Starovoitov Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] bpf: make tracing helpers gpl only Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 11:17:58 -0700 Message-ID: <562D1CD6.6020307@plumgrid.com> References: <1445637499-11146-1-git-send-email-ast@kernel.org> <20151025091411.GE24337@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David S. Miller" , Peter Zijlstra , Wang Nan , He Kuang , Kaixu Xia , Daniel Borkmann , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Ingo Molnar Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20151025091411.GE24337@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 10/25/15 2:14 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > so I don't know the netfilter ones, but in particular the tracing ones I'm sure > should be gpl-only. Do we really, really want proprietary modules mucking with > such internals?? of course, not. Therefore bpf_probe_read() was gpl_only from very beginning. Same goes to bpf_trace_printk() and bpf_ktime_get_ns(). and after this patch the only remaining non-gpl tracing helpers will be bpf_get_current_pid_tgid()/uid_gid()/comm() and imo it's fine. On the networking side the helpers are non-gpl, since all of them are generic. They don't mess with kernel, but examine/modify the packet. Just like cBPF can read the packet data, get_processor_id, get_random, eBPF can do the same plus write into the packet, compute checksum, redirect, push/pop vlan. When we introduce eBPF for seccomp, I would argue that helpers on that side should be non-gpl as well, otherwise people will try to add features to cBPF instead of moving to eBPF.